| Message ID | 20200805084045.1549492-1-willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [net] selftests/net: relax cpu affinity requirement in msg_zerocopy test | expand |
On 05/08/2020 09:40, Willem de Bruijn wrote: > From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com> > > The msg_zerocopy test pins the sender and receiver threads to separate > cores to reduce variance between runs. > > But it hardcodes the cores and skips core 0, so it fails on machines > with the selected cores offline, or simply fewer cores. > > The test mainly gives code coverage in automated runs. The throughput > of zerocopy ('-z') and non-zerocopy runs is logged for manual > inspection. > > Continue even when sched_setaffinity fails. Just log to warn anyone > interpreting the data. > > Fixes: 07b65c5b31ce ("test: add msg_zerocopy test") > Reported-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > Signed-off-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com> > --- > tools/testing/selftests/net/msg_zerocopy.c | 5 ++--- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/msg_zerocopy.c b/tools/testing/selftests/net/msg_zerocopy.c > index 4b02933cab8a..bdc03a2097e8 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/msg_zerocopy.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/msg_zerocopy.c > @@ -125,9 +125,8 @@ static int do_setcpu(int cpu) > CPU_ZERO(&mask); > CPU_SET(cpu, &mask); > if (sched_setaffinity(0, sizeof(mask), &mask)) > - error(1, 0, "setaffinity %d", cpu); > - > - if (cfg_verbose) > + fprintf(stderr, "cpu: unable to pin, may increase variance.\n"); > + else if (cfg_verbose) > fprintf(stderr, "cpu: %u\n", cpu); > > return 0; > Thanks, you solution is good for my testing requirements Acked-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 04:40:45 -0400 > From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com> > > The msg_zerocopy test pins the sender and receiver threads to separate > cores to reduce variance between runs. > > But it hardcodes the cores and skips core 0, so it fails on machines > with the selected cores offline, or simply fewer cores. > > The test mainly gives code coverage in automated runs. The throughput > of zerocopy ('-z') and non-zerocopy runs is logged for manual > inspection. > > Continue even when sched_setaffinity fails. Just log to warn anyone > interpreting the data. > > Fixes: 07b65c5b31ce ("test: add msg_zerocopy test") > Reported-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > Signed-off-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com> Applied and queued up for -stable, thanks.
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/msg_zerocopy.c b/tools/testing/selftests/net/msg_zerocopy.c index 4b02933cab8a..bdc03a2097e8 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/msg_zerocopy.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/msg_zerocopy.c @@ -125,9 +125,8 @@ static int do_setcpu(int cpu) CPU_ZERO(&mask); CPU_SET(cpu, &mask); if (sched_setaffinity(0, sizeof(mask), &mask)) - error(1, 0, "setaffinity %d", cpu); - - if (cfg_verbose) + fprintf(stderr, "cpu: unable to pin, may increase variance.\n"); + else if (cfg_verbose) fprintf(stderr, "cpu: %u\n", cpu); return 0;